James Mattis

ZeroHedge| Secretary of Defense James Mattis stated on or about February 2nd, 2018 that the United States has “no evidence” that the Syrian government used the banned nerve agent Sarin against its own people in attacks in 2013 and 2017.

The most recent accusation provoked a massive Tomahawk strike ordered by President Trumpthat was quite provocative in the eyes of the Russian Federation and of course the Syrian government.

As TheDuran’s Seraphim Hanish details, Secretary Mattis’ assertion is in direct contradiction to the White House Memorandum which was rapidly written and declassified to justify the Americans’ strike.

However, the Secretary offered no specifics to his statement. He did discuss the fact that there were aid groups and other people, including NGOs and other fighters operating in the area that had provided evidence and reports of what happened with the Sarin strike. Their information stopped short of naming President Assad as the culprit.

“I don’t have the evidence,” Mattis said. “What I am saying is that other groups on the ground – NGOs, fighters on the ground – have said that sarin has been used, so we are looking for evidence.”

General “Mad Dog” Mattis, is known for an uncompromising approach to dealing with America’s enemies:

Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.

He was an outspoken critic of President Obama’s Middle East policy, naming Iran as the single most serious threat to stability in the region. By all accounts, then, the General is faithful to the idea that projecting American power abroad is a good thing.

Seen with this context, the general’s statement seems unusual, and the media outlets that have a less than favorable view of Donald Trump as the American President have been quick to jump on board the train to point out that the General disagrees with his CO, the President.

Sadly, if this issue is able to gain traction, it is only going to do so as long as it serves the media’s narrative that President Trump is crazy or stupid, and should not be trusted with the leadership of the nation. No doubt this will be spun as 25th amendment material, since the President “could in a moment of passion, decide to nuke someone.”

It is important also to consider that the statement that Gen. Mattis gave is not that he says he disagrees with the Trump decision to launch the Tomahawk strike. He is only saying there is no evidence in his possession that confirms the the Syrian government was behind these attacks.

Furthering this point, it is difficult at times to get hard evidence of such things in an active war zone.

Contextually, there are three possible agencies that could have done this attack: (1) the Syrian government, (2) the fighters of whichever group, like Al-Nusra or ISIS who elected to use this to frame the Syrian government, and (3) the US, in an attempt to frame the Assad regime.

The Americans were not invited to help Assad, so their presence in Syria is an inconvenient truth – Syria cannot expel them, but they were never wanted, and even by the American people, involvement in yet another Middle Eastern nation is not high on the “things I want my country to do” list for most Americans.

The loser in this situation is the United States, because of the mishandling of this conflict. While most of the conflict and the American action in it took place during the Obama era, it is probably the case that if the USA simply gathered all its troops and equipment and retreated to Israel or the Mediterranean Sea, or just plain left, the result might be a great deal worse for the Russian and Syrian national forces already there.

The problem here is that there may well be a serious intelligence breach or failure that created or allowed the decision to launch that Tomahawk strike. Russia Today also ran the Mattis piece, because to do so suits the Russian narrative that there is no way Bashar Assad would use gas on his own people. Indeed, it does not make rational sense to a Westerner how a dictator retains power when his country is already a war zone and watched by world powers. To do a mass killing of one’s own citizens under such a watchful eye seems a highly absurd course for any leader to take.

The further problem is the reality of conditions on the ground. As this report points out, the Americans may be in a situation where foolish decisions by previous administrations and maybe even this one, have created a situation where they cannot leave.

With homelessness growing by the numbers in America due to poor economic conditions in the country, it looks like the US war machine puppets are ready for more war …and wanting to make it even more deadly than it already is.

Defense Secretary James Mattis on Thursday told House and Senate GOP lawmakers gathered at a party retreat here that the Trump administration will request $716 billion for defense spending for the new fiscal year that begins Oct. 1.

That figure is nearly $50 billion, or 7 percent, higher than Trump’s fiscal 2018 budget request for the Pentagon.

“I’m not subtle,” Mattis told GOP lawmakers at their annual retreat at the famed Greenbriar resort, which allows tours of its Cold War-era nuclear fallout shelters.

“I need to make the military more lethal. Some people think I’m supposed to be an equal-opportunity employer,” Mattis added, according to several sources in the closed-door meeting. That appeared to be a veiled shot at Democrats who have called for fiscal parity, with domestic spending receiving the same increase as defense spending.

Speaking to Congressional Republicans during a visit to Greenbriar resort on Thursday, Defense Secretary James Mattis announced that he believes the US military needs to be made “more lethal,” and pushing for yet more money.

After a massive military spending increase last year, Mattis says he wants another $50 billion tacked on for next year. He mocked the idea of the military being an “equal opportunity employer” and emphasized lethality.

Mattis had similarly pushed the idea of making US troops more lethal in September, in the context of pushing for more predictable spending increases. This time as well he complained about continuing resolutions as a funding source, wanting money set out for a longer term.

Mattis says he is hoping to get 3-5% increases annually over the rate of inflation to both build readiness and to compete with Russia and China.

The US already far outspends all nations on their military.

Presenting the push for more funds as a push for lethality appears to be popular with hawks, though in practice the US military already kills a massive number of people as it is, and doesn’t seem to be approaching the limit of how many it could kill in a pinch.

As Amazon continues to entrench itself as the nation’s commissary, huge government supply deals like the $53 billion Pentagon-Amazon procurement deal Congress is set to authorize leave little room for competitors and raise the specter of government-coddled monopoly.

If the NDAA is approved in its current form, which is highly likely according to experts, Bezos’ Amazon sets to gain $53 billion in revenue by becoming the chief supplier of an array of goods to the Department of Defense.

The deal is laid out in a section titled “Procurement Through Commercial E-Commerce Portals,” in which the DOD would be required to purchase commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) products — such as office supplies — from “e-commerce portals” dominated by Amazon.

Though congressmen — including the NDAA’s author, Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX) — have asserted that there will be healthy “competition” among such portals, Amazon’s massive advantages in these markets are clear, particularly given how Amazon often overtakes markets on its own “free market” platform by edging out third-party vendors.

In addition, the Coalition for Government Procurement (CGP) stated in a memo issued last month that only one or two companies would be able to participate, given the parameters put forth by the current version of the bill. Several industry sources cited by Bloomberg stated that Amazon tops that very short list. The memo further argues that the current proposal is likely to “result in monopoly or duopoly control over access to the Federal market for commercial items.” Given that Amazon accounted for 43% of all online retail sales made in the U.S. last year, it is clear who stands to benefit most from this new, proposed federal acquisition model.

Indeed, Thornberry’s own words make it clear that the proposal is set up to disproportionately benefit Amazon. In June, Thornberry introduced this aspect by the NDAA by stating that “if you’re buying office supplies, you ought to be able to go on Amazon and do it.”

Amazon lobbying’s spectacular ROI

President Donald Trump, left, and Satya Nadella, Chief Executive Officer of Microsoft, center, listen as Jeff Bezos, Chief Executive Officer of Amazon, speaks during an American Technology Council roundtable in the State Dinning Room of the White House, Monday, June 19, 2017, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Thornberry’s preference for Amazon is hardly surprising, given that Amazon has poured millions of dollars into lobbying him and other Congressmen in recent years.

In 2017 alone, Amazon has thus far spent $9.66 million dollars lobbying Congress, ranking it as the 15th biggest spender on Congressional lobbying for this year and is set to outspend other mega-corporations such as Dow Chemical and ExxonMobil. According to filings of one of the lobbying firms hired by Amazon this year, TwinLogic Strategies, Amazon explicitly lobbied Congress on the “modernization of the procurement process” in the second and third quarters of fiscal year 2017.

The corporate giant has also spent an additional $264,500 in direct contributions to current lawmakers, a figure that is likely to grow as the 2018 election cycle gets underway. With such “generosity” lavished upon Congress, Amazon’s efforts to “modernize” the federal procurement process in its favor are likely to be well received.

Amazon’s potential $53 billion deal with the Department of Defense will dwarf the retail giant’s prior deals with the federal government. In 2013, Amazon acquired a $600 million contract with the CIA, which later led to Amazon Web Services becoming the webmaster for the entire U.S. intelligence community. Since then, Amazon has been accused of “currying favor” with the intelligence community — as has The Washington Post, also owned by Jeff Bezos.

This year, Amazon has gained access to a much larger share of government spending.

In January, Amazon won another contract with U.S. communities – a coalition of 90,000 local governments – in which it became the chief supplier of local government COTS products. In March, other federal agencies, such as the Department of Homeland Security, expanded their ties with Amazon into a “partner relationship” that nets the company about $450 million annually.

Currently, the U.S. AbilityOne Commission, a federal program that provides jobs to people with disabilities who sell products to government customers, is holding talks with Amazon Business representatives “to discuss opportunities to expand the selection of AbilityOne products online.” However, all of these deals are loose change compared to the potential $53 billion Amazon stands to gain annually from the Department of Defense.

Bezos’ personal connections with government are just as cozy. In 2016, he joined a Pentagon advisory board. In August of this year, he hosted Secretary of Defense James Mattis at Amazon headquarters in Seattle. This latest effort to further unite the Bezos’ business empire and the U.S. government has all the makings of a monopoly — one that both serves and is protected by the state – making it highly unlikely that any challenge to Amazon’s (and Bezos’) growing influence will come anytime soon.

Primary Sidebar

About A Sheep No More

A Sheep No More is no longer plugged into the Matrix like the many sheep who are still programmed to believe that they have correct information provided by a varied and “independent media.” In fact the media is owned by 5 or 6 mega-media companies run by corporate advertising executives and Washington.